In post 273, sottyrulez wrote:Ace is claiming we stole Vi's opinions, made them our own and expanded on them. This is blatantly not true, you just have to look at the reasons behind each of our votes for you for example. Here's a hint, they aren't even close to the same. Vi voted you for your weak wagon hop, something we didn't even mention. Ace is trying to link us to Vi in a negative way by suggesting we're sheeping without original thought of our own. I would also like to point out we were suspious of ace well before Vi's vote on him, but that messes up his point of us being the so called black sheep. So yeah.
sottyrulez wrote:It's almost like he wants to scare us into not following Vi in the future if the situation would arise. I wonder why, I mean he seems to agree Vi is town and if he truly finds bandwagoning scummy, us continuing to do it would look bad wouldn't it? And scum following town like a little lost puppy dog means that the hyposcum vote is still being influenced by the hypotown. In all, it makes me think he is seeing a potential town voting block and is looking to dirty it as soon as possible disregarding the facts of how it actually played out. Instead, he strips the actions down to be as minimal as possible (votes) and accuses us of locking onto Vi while providing no or "silly" content along the way without actually quoting it and proving his point (because he can't).
In post 139, sottyrulez wrote:Post 63 is a massive red flag for us. What makes them certain that Vi's not faking the post restriction? Reaction here reeks of inside knowledge. (Also I personally disliked the way they seemed to attempt to shut down this line of discussion by lumping it into an accusation that attempting to communicate with Vi is trying to modkill Vi.)
CrabCanon wrote:How about we all stop asking Viabout her post restrictionin an effort to get her modkilled? It's pretty obvious what her restriction is, and there is nothing she can do about it. If you can't figure it out on your own, then that's your problem.
In post 322, saulres wrote:ace5993 wrote:sotty, that's exactly what she (one of your heads) said
Whatis exactly whatwhosaid?
Vi translation (to the best of my ability, correct me if I misinterpret anything) wrote:
220 - Votes ace because he thinks ace is slandering the CrabCanon wagon in a bad way. Also he believes CrabCanon vs. sotty is looking like an unproductive slap-fight.
253 - Concerned that CrabCanon said ace's name when he meant 4nxi3ty's name, I'm guessing the reasoning is that CrabCanon allegedly had ace's name in his head because Vi think's they're scum-buddies. More concern about ace's defense of CrabCanon.
376 - Says that the main reason he's voting aceisdue to CrabCanon - ace relationship.
ace5993 295 wrote:Name mix-ups are VERY important to look at, who's thelikely to mess up a name and in what situation? HINT: Scum usually have pretty good ideas of who their scumbuddies are.least
In post 391, ace5993 wrote:springlullaby ISO:
#3 - No participation in RVS/fluff
#20, #26 - Townhunting
#27 - Fluff
#28 - Townhunting
#54 - Fluff
#84 - Still lacking of any form of scumhunting
#159 - He says sotty's aggressiveness is "good for the town", and fence-sits on CrabCanon
In post 455, Locke Lamora wrote:Ace: why is my 124 'neutral' yet multiple SL one-liners are 'fluff'? Why are my first two posts 'decent' yet SL 84 and 159 are dismissed? You're obviously not treating us even remotely similarly, you're just stretching and creating a dichotomy to make SL look scummier. The fact that you're now actually relying on this nonsense as a 'case' reinforces my scum read
In post 483, Locke Lamora wrote:Yes, I see the difference. SL stated that she likes to lurk a few times. You seem to be implying that the overall volume of SL's posts negatively affects the content of each individual post.
In post 518, sottyrulez wrote:The quicktopic discussion conveyed a feeling that you were trying to blend in too much. I can actually paste some quicktopic posts which convey our thought process on you but I don't really find it necessary.
In post 577, 4nxi3ty wrote:spring is either a vanilla townie or less likely a third party.
In post 605, 4nxi3ty wrote:though while we're waiting maybe you would like to explain your fencesitting on springlullaby...
In post 614, 4nxi3ty wrote:did you completely forget about it or was it not that important. And by the way i don't need to justify myself since i was right about spring and sotty.
Vi wrote:I thought VP Baltar (Crab Canon)'s post was kind of odd, and then I looked back and saw that Riggs left something off of his copy/paste. Here's the first part of the post.
All right. Time for you to prove yourself.
---
I want you to out yourself as Penn Jilette in your next post and quote this entire post on my behalf, with no editions. You don't get to ask why and you don't get to object. This is, bar nothing, the most pro-Town thing you can do at this point. If you post anywhere on site and do not post this, I will treat it as a scum claim and act accordingly.
Let's just get everything cleared up, since I'd hate to see springlullaby walk free Today. (...)
So that should answer some questions - I didn't exactly give Riggs a choice but to come forward.
Riggs is on the chopping block because he has been completely useless inthread and a deer in the headlights in the QT. I've looked at some other games and quite frankly I can't justify a legitimate confused Town read on him in favor of a newbscum read.
Vi wrote:Riggs is playing one or two other games as well. There is ~content~. Cue surprise.
There is actually one big thing in the QT that sets off alarms, aside from his continued ignorance of my constant pleas for him to say something, anything that looks like scumhunting. With that said, I'd like to keep that to myself for right now.
In post 649, Fishythefish wrote:Ah, ok.
In that case, I think that Vi should make a post in the G_N_R QT saying exactly what she doesn't like about him there - it seems important to her case on him. If G_N_R doesn't relay it, we lynch him.
Fishythefish wrote:I don't know what you mean by that. It wouldn't have to involve your neighbourhood at all.
In post 653, saulres wrote:Ace, why do you assume that Vi's "other" neighborhood is a neighborhood at all? Couldn't it be a scum QT and she's setting herself up through you to look town?
saulres wrote:There's an easy way to check that, I guess.Vote: GNR. If he flips scum we've killed scum, if he flips town we've killed the "scum QT" theory and can start looking at why Vi's reads are so bad this game.
saulres wrote:Further, the possibility certainly exists that Ace and Vi and GNR are all scum, and this is the story they've concocted. So Ace, tonight you need to pull someone else into your neighborhood, and they have to confirm tomorrow that they were there. Pull in someone you don't think will be NKed or the experiment is useless.
Vi wrote:Except -- when Ace first posted he voted for 4nxi3ty (can't fault him for that), and he didn't "come clean" until after Vi announced her V/LA...
In post 658, saulres wrote:In post 657, ace5993 wrote:We aren't going to just lynch GNR based on what Vi said,at least not until GNR makes a response.
In post 645, ace5993 wrote:Unvote, Vote: Guy_Named_Riggs,and I'm interested to hear his defense to this.
Vi wrote:I'm still calling the team as Riggs + Fishy + mystery card with a knit cap poking out of the top, and at present I would not lynch outside that group Today. Fishy's attempt to score points in 649 is so bad I'm tempted to switch my vote.
This Neighborhood is separate from the Penn/Teller QT, and I've since jumped over to using this QT exclusively, to answer Riggs' objection about not knowing about this QT. Besides, ace is doing everything Riggs should be doing, plus he's online more frequently so he can more effectively communicate for meYou're welcome to believe what you want about my/Riggs'/ace's alignments, but the roles are as claimed.
In post 661, saulres wrote:It's not a misrep. You said you want to hear his defense, at the same time voting for him. Then you said "we aren't going to lynch" him. But you left your vote on him. If you wanted to help ensure he's not lynched until he has a chance to talk, you'd have removed your vote, as I did.
Vi wrote:Both me and Riggs are 1xBulletproof (Penn and Teller, or more specifically Teller but that doesn't seem to be important to this game, can do a very dangerous bullet catch trick). The very FIRST thing Riggs did (okay, it was his second post, but etc.) was rolefish me for it.
Here are some selected quotes.
HelloRiggs 5:
what exactly is your post restriction?[/i]
So he evidently doesn't know who Teller is.
Also, I know who Teller is, just not a whole lot.Riggs 7:
I have a video of like 20 different magic acts, and Penn and Teller did there bullet catching trick.
The host started off reading a letter that went something like,
"Houdini wanted to preform this trick. When others learned of this, they told Houdini to stop, saying they couldn't afford to lose him. When people learned that Penn and Teller wanted to learn this trick, they said 'Go for it.'"[/i]
Cute story, but there's one fish.
Oh right, don't forget - Penn Jillette speaks for both himself and Teller. I suspect that was the intent of this role set. If it becomes a good idea at some time in the future, it's certainly possible for you to claim Penn and claim me as Teller and interpret for me. I don't think that anyone will doubt it, given that the mod is fairly well-known as a P&T fan. [/b]Vi 17:
Ah, okay. Your post restiriction makes much more sense now. [/i]Riggs 18:
So let me see if I have this right. He knew about the bullet catch trick but not Teller's manner of (not) speaking? I only learned about the bullet catch trick from researching Teller AFTER seeing BULLSHIT!, and I'm just having a very hard time figuring out how he would know about who has done the bullet catch (not many people in history, especially successfully), knowing that P&T had done it, and NOT knowing about Teller's shtick.
Riggs 19:Also, do we have the same ability?
Since we both did the bullet dodge trick, does that mean you have a bullet dodge power when it is needed? Because I do.
As it turns out, I do, though I didn't say that to him (he could probably figure it out from how I didn't deny it though). Also, fish #2.
This may not seem like a concerted effort to rolefish until you consider that this seems to be the only thing Riggs has put effort into all game - either inthread, or in the QT.
And THAT is why I'm wondering if sottyrulez was vigged. There are clandestine ways of blocking kills running around.
I can tell you all of Riggs' stances while I'm here.
*Post 9, 9/18: Junpei is probably not scum since his wagon seems to be too much RVS. (It wasn't RVS)
*Post 18, 9/20: Crab Canon was trying to bus ace. (He was actually thinking of sottyrulez; he also made this mistake in his post)
*Post 32, 9/30: Locke Lamora's hammer was suss, and he'll look into it later.
That's - it, and it's still three times what he's said inthread.
VI wrote:ITT Fishy gives Riggs way, way, way too much credit. Come on, am I really that untrustworthy that he's willing to dismiss what might be (and is) sensitive information?
Notice Amrun on the sidelines. Crab Canon is absent as well, having jumped off the Riggs wagon.
Vi wrote:So normally I would feel bad for Riggs right now but there's something [scumhunting] he's noticeably not doing.
In post 703, Locke Lamora wrote:Ace: can you describe exactly why you thought this might prove anything about either Vi or GNR's alignments?
Vi (34) wrote:So this is turning ugly. What's terrible about this is that this is becoming one giant distraction - I know I'm not scum, and I'm pretty sure you're not scum either, but that's where all the attention is. The problem is that a lot of the noise about us is coming from my other Town reads. The scum are the ones in the background.
The Town read I had on Crab Canon is evaporating quickly. Compared to Day 1 vs. sottyrulez, they're way on the sidelines and willing to push you with a case they should know better than to have. The difference between you and Riggs, in terms of who is more likely to be Town, is incredibly telling (said Teller).
I'm sure you aren'tplanningto get lynched, but I don't think we can afford to lose Today.
Vi (35) wrote:...
Scum with Riggs trying to kill me when I didn't exactly deny that I was Bulletproof does sound ludicrous.
In addition, I don't even have proof that I was shot N1 to begin with, and I don't think I was that high-priority of a kill (probably more than sottyrulez though).
The lack of a Vig claiming, since everyone has come forward, probably means that there's no Vig, thus no one is going to claim the sottyrulez kill. Then one of the following is true...
1) There is only one kill at Night, and they killed sottyrulez.
2) There are two kills at Night, one of which is sponsored by an SK.
The problem with the second option is that the sottyrulez kill looks like it was meant to hit scum, which means that Riggs-scum still wouldn't have had reason to target me...
If there is a second killer, perhaps it's saulres based on his first post of D2. This is just conjecture; right or wrong he's not worth pursuing atm.
If on the other hand sottyrulez was killed by the Mafia in either scenario, then the Riggs lynch is still a good idea.
However, I don't know why there would be TWO Bulletproofs (of any alignment) in a game unless there were two kills running aboot...
...which means... perhaps it's better to let Riggs go for now?
Vi (36) wrote:ace5993 is Town because he didn't stop doing EVERYTHING after he started talking to me. He continued to push Anxiety (against my opinion) and has tried to maintain his own sense of figuring out what's going on. I don't think he would have suddenly turned on me and then turned back around as scum, in addition; it seemed like a natural flow of thought.
Contrast EVERYTHING Riggs has done and stands for.
Once my previous post (35) has been posted I will probably move my vote to you, Crab Canon (based on post 34). Have a nice day.
Vi wrote:Also,is a smirk. If I were dramonic I might say "orly" in place of it.
4nxi3ty wrote:People in thread are giving 4nxi3ty way too much credit, he's literally nothing more than a VI. Which makes me think that it would actually be plausible for him to commit a scumtell like #577.
Vi wrote:Given Anxiety's behavior toward [a GNR lynch] (post 759), that's a good question. [question was me asking why jump off GNR]
However, did you see what Crab Canon did? A jump to Riggs (evidently trusting me), then a jump to ace (evidently NOT trusting me), then a jump back to Riggs. The reasoning all the way down doesn't make sense.
Reading back, is this really the same slot that had the reads shown in 359? :fauxshock:
Juls (of Crab Canon) 529:Why are all of us who have strong scum reads on ace having to compromise for the much weaker SL wagon?!?!?!
My first reaction to this sentence here is to lynch Crab Canon immediately, without hesitation, with fire if necessary.
---
Fishy's claim, on the other hand...
I know that scum CAN awesomely fakeclaim in situations like this, but so far, I've never actually seen it done. I'll have to reconsider the Anxious one based on it.
In post 786, 4nxi3ty wrote:^pay attention folks
saulres ignores my questions and ace is suddenly not interested in riggs.
ace i was simply stating my read. why do you choose to pressure me about the springlullaby post and not the nameclaim?
Vi wrote:LOL 853.
I don't know about you but I'd rather take my chances with Riggs than Anxiety. I know I've said I wave a white flag and cry when I draw scum, but this is Riggs almost literally doing so inthread.